Nobody. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely - and no matter how good a Prez might be, everybody runs out of ideas eventually. Ike and Obama both deserved more than two terms, though.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply R. I agree with both your choices. I thought Truman was a good guy too. He was HONEST and TOOK RESPONSIBILITY! SIGH. Happy Monday/Tuesday to ya! :)
"Give 'em Hell Harry" was the man who gave the order to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki, despite the deal Roosevelt made with Stalin - and for no better reason than to keep the USSR out of the Pacific War and prevent it from gaining a toe-hold in Japan. Tough to forgive.
Well there's nothing I can say to refute or rebut that. I do have a question though. Would more lives have been lost had the war continued for however long it might have continued had it not been for that decisive occurrence? Perhaps there is no way to come up with an answer to that question. Thank you for your reply R! :) I know the scientists who worked on it regretted it...at least some have indicated so. At the time it seemed like a good idea. How many turn out not to be? I'm gonna ask.
No I would never think in such terms. People get elected, they do their thing. do their jobs, and then they move on. Two terms are plenty and why would we ever trust anyone with any more power than that. I liked Romney very much but he didn't get in. Trump got in who I liked less but that is life. I voted for Al Gore who did not get in. But the idea of anyone being in "for life" is to me un-American.
If we're gonna have a "for life" appointment ... I'd rather go back under a Monarchy. Not a full Monarchy, of course. A Parliamentary Monarchy - similar to Great Britain. But make political parties illegal, while we're at it.
Slartibartfast 